In our systematic literature search, we included studies involving patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) and outcome measures of work participation. Methodological quality was assessed using 11 criteria; a qualitative data analysis was performed. Fifty-three full-text articles were selected out of 1861 abstracts; finally, data were extracted from 14 articles. Design, populations, definitions, and measurements in the studies showed large variations; work outcomes were often only secondary objectives. The outcomes were summarized as showing a mild negative effect of OA on work participation. Many patients had paid work and managed to stay at work despite limitations. However, research on the effect of OA on work participation is scarce and the methodological quality is often insufficient. The longitudinal course of work participation in individuals with OA has not been described completely.
Objectives The aim of this study was to study measurement properties of the Dutch Language Version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS‐DLV) in blue and white collar workers employed at multiple companies and to compare the validity and factor structure to other language versions. Methods Workers (n = 1023) were assessed during a cross‐sectional health surveillance. Construct validity was tested with exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) and hypothesis testing. Reliability was tested with Cronbach's alpha. Results A two‐factor structure of the BRS‐DLV had good model fit in both EFA and CFA, which could be explained by difficulties of workers with reversed order items. After excluding these inconsistent answering patterns, a one‐factor structure showed good model fit resembling the original BRS (χ 2 = 16.5; CFI & TLI = 0.99; SRMR = 0.02;RMSEA = 0.04). Internal consistency is sufficient (Cronbach's α = 0.78). All five hypotheses were confirmed, suggesting construct validity. Conclusions Reliability of the BRS‐DLV is sufficient and there is evidence of construct validity. Inconsistent answering, however, caused problems in interpretation and factor structure of the BRS‐DLV. This can be easily detected and handled because item 2, 4 and 6 are in reversed order. Other language versions differ in factor structure, most likely because systematic errors are not corrected for. To collect valid data, it is advised to be aware of inconsistent answering of respondents.
Objective To examine the work participation of Dutch people with early osteoarthritis (OA) in hips or knees and compare this with data from the American Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) cohort. The influence of health status and personal factors on work participation was analyzed. Methods In the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) study, 1,002 subjects were included. Baseline questionnaire data from 970 subjects were analyzed. Rate ratios were calculated to compare work participation with the general Dutch population, after correcting (by stratifying) for age, sex, and education. Health status was measured using the Short Form 36 health survey and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Groups were compared (CHECK versus OAI, workers versus nonworkers) using t-tests. Results The mean age of the subjects was 56 years and 79% were women. Overall participation was 51%, similar to the general Dutch population and lower than in the OAI (76%). Point prevalence of sick leave because of hip/knee symptoms was 2%, and year prevalence was 12%. Of the subjects, 14% had made work adaptations. Workers reported significantly better health status (corrected for age, sex, and education) than nonworkers. Conclusion Work participation of Dutch people with early OA is similar to the general population and significantly lower than American subjects. Increasing age, female sex, and lower education level were related to lower participation. Societal factors appear to have had more effect on work participation than health status in this stage of OA. The better health status of workers could not be explained solely by selection bias, but may be a result of work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.